Bombertalk

Has anyone watched the Simon Madden interview? Apparently he says something along the lines of the club knows/ has evidence of what was given to the players. If this is true, why haven't they made this public/ jammed it up ASADA's clacker?

Gimps wrote:Has anyone watched the Simon Madden interview? Apparently he says something along the lines of the club knows/ has evidence of what was given to the players. If this is true, why haven't they made this public/ jammed it up ASADA's clacker?

Hopefully it's not evidence we did take TB4

Gimps wrote:Has anyone watched the Simon Madden interview? Apparently he says something along the lines of the club knows/ has evidence of what was given to the players. If this is true, why haven't they made this public/ jammed it up ASADA's clacker?

THIS.

And yeah, maybe the evidence is not good for EFC, and the club is better off copping penalties for what we maybe did, rather than what they actually did.

How can it be anything else? Why would the club go through all this crap if they had proof of no wrongdoing?
(let's watch the tinfoil hat wearers come out and say EFC do have evidence of innocence but no-one will allow the club to use it)

PS - if there is proof of innocence, and yet the club has put everyone through this mess anyway, then players surely will have cause to sue the club and ask for breach of contract.

FMD....another pile of steaming shit has just been uncovered.
AFL Anti-Doping Code clause 17.2 says that only ASADA or WADA can appeal to CAS if unhappy with Appeals Board decision.

How f****** ridiculous is it that you can possibly have an appeals process that is only open to one party of a proceeding?
I agree with the first reaction I read...are the AFLPA completely asleep at the wheel at all times?

Very concerning that this means Essendon are 100% at the mercy of ASADA and AFL processes now. f***.

Gyoza wrote:FMD....another pile of steaming shit has just been uncovered.
AFL Anti-Doping Code clause 17.2 says that only ASADA or WADA can appeal to CAS if unhappy with Appeals Board decision.

How f****** ridiculous is it that you can possibly have an appeals process that is only open to one party of a proceeding?
I agree with the first reaction I read...are the AFLPA completely asleep at the wheel at all times?

Very concerning that this means Essendon are 100% at the mercy of ASADA and AFL processes now. f***.

OMFG!! That's a pile of steaming s***
As if I wasn't pessimistic enough already.
I already had little confidence that anyone is interested in seeing EFC escape these charges, and now.....we apparently have no chance of even asking someone to side with us.

nudder12 wrote:

Gyoza wrote:FMD....another pile of steaming shit has just been uncovered.
AFL Anti-Doping Code clause 17.2 says that only ASADA or WADA can appeal to CAS if unhappy with Appeals Board decision.

How f****** ridiculous is it that you can possibly have an appeals process that is only open to one party of a proceeding?
I agree with the first reaction I read...are the AFLPA completely asleep at the wheel at all times?

Very concerning that this means Essendon are 100% at the mercy of ASADA and AFL processes now. f***.

OMFG!! That's a pile of steaming s***
As if I wasn't pessimistic enough already.
I already had little confidence that anyone is interested in seeing EFC escape these charges, and now.....we apparently have no chance of even asking someone to side with us.

Yep. When Saad went through to the Appeals Board his case was chaired by a QC (apparently the longest serving in VIc). But who else heard the case? An ex AFL umpire and an ex AFL footballer. Jesus christ.

If anyone wants to take a further look, most of my info coming from @chriskaias

Gyoza wrote:FMD....another pile of steaming shit has just been uncovered.
AFL Anti-Doping Code clause 17.2 says that only ASADA or WADA can appeal to CAS if unhappy with Appeals Board decision.

How f****** ridiculous is it that you can possibly have an appeals process that is only open to one party of a proceeding?
I agree with the first reaction I read...are the AFLPA completely asleep at the wheel at all times?

Very concerning that this means Essendon are 100% at the mercy of ASADA and AFL processes now. f***.

'tis a beautiful set-up,isn't it?
But; we haven't and we should dangle a carrot in front of the AFL and we haven't dangled yet. The AFL has joint responsibility with the EFC in the duty of care and all OHS. The AFL were negligent in their duty of care and failed to observe OHS regulations to the EFC players. And; stood by, watched and did nothing while a "supposed pharmacology experiment" was happening at Essendon. There were also 11 other clubs doing similar things. That is two thirds of the AFL competition. That's a damning stat in anyone's language. And yet, not even worthy of a news story.

Actually the AFL had a huge conflict of interest because they stood beside the ACC and ASADA and ignored the risk to the players. By doing so, they put the players wellbeing and health in danger. Everything that is being said in the media about Essendon lack of responsibility also applies to the AFL. So it is tit for tat, the AFL cannot have it both ways, they deserted the players when they needed them most. They can no longer accuse Essendon without sharing joint responsibility of governance and risk management.

mdso wrote:

Gyoza wrote:FMD....another pile of steaming shit has just been uncovered.
AFL Anti-Doping Code clause 17.2 says that only ASADA or WADA can appeal to CAS if unhappy with Appeals Board decision.

How f****** ridiculous is it that you can possibly have an appeals process that is only open to one party of a proceeding?
I agree with the first reaction I read...are the AFLPA completely asleep at the wheel at all times?

Very concerning that this means Essendon are 100% at the mercy of ASADA and AFL processes now. f***.

'tis a beautiful set-up,isn't it?
But; we have or I should the players have a carrot they haven't dangled yet. The AFL has joint responsibility with the EFC in the duty of care and all OHS. The AFL were also negligent in their duty of care to the EFC players. And; stood by, watched and did nothing while a "supposed pharmacology experiment" was happening at Essendon. There were also 11 other clubs doing similar things. Actually they had a conflict of interest because they stood beside the ACC and ASADA and ignored the risk to the players. By doing so, they put the players wellbeing and health in danger. Everything that is being said in the media about Essendon lack of responsibility also applies to the AFL. So it is tit for tat, the AFL cannot have it both ways, they deserted the players when they needed them most. They can no longer accuse Essendon without sharing joint responsibility.

Good luck with that. Not saying there's not at least a small slice of truth to that, but there's zero chance of anything being successfully pursued down those lines.

It could be useful if we get to a stage of dealing.

It certainly wouldn't be difficult to prove. As the AFL admitted they were remiss in the matter.

http://www.watoday.com.au/afl/afl-news/ ... 0mcfk.html

Interesting article (c*** still has a dig at Hird!!) but I like the general direction - prove it ASADA! Players don't need to deal and this could take a long time as he mentions each player can challenge each case individually - now that drags the club down for years I know and I am not a fan of that idea - but, for the individual, being cleared as a drug cheat would have to be priority numero uno....

Not sure who the author is apart from the footnote that he is a "Sydney Sports Lawyer"

Q: What if all 34 players ignore the SCN's?

BenDoolan wrote:Q: What if all 34 players ignore the SCN's?

I would assume that would allow ASADA to issue infraction notices when they see fit.

Gimps wrote:

BenDoolan wrote:Q: What if all 34 players ignore the SCN's?

I would assume that would allow ASADA to issue infraction notices when they see fit.

They don't issue them. ADRVP may do it if there is enough evidence. All ASADA can do is put them all on the register of findings. I say, stiff shit. Don't bother answering the show causes notices and see what happens. Treat them with the contempt it deserves.

It couldn't have been anyone from the Sunday Crimes,West!

Just watching Game Day before the Grand Final where they showed Longmire and the Swans heading off for a coffee in the morning. It then jogged my memory of the use of caffeine and sleeping tablets by AFL players...

http://m.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/sto ... 100lq.html

Where are the journos (hello mutant c***, Caro) outrage at putting the players health at risk?

Just wondering...

BenDoolan wrote:

Gimps wrote:

BenDoolan wrote:Q: What if all 34 players ignore the SCN's?

I would assume that would allow ASADA to issue infraction notices when they see fit.

They don't issue them. ADRVP may do it if there is enough evidence. All ASADA can do is put them all on the register of findings. I say, stiff shit. Don't bother answering the show causes notices and see what happens. Treat them with the contempt it deserves.

May as well. What is anyone going to do about it?

The AFL have already dished out their punishment.

Does anyone remember that feeling on grand final day when the Dons used to be involved

I need some AO9064 to jog my memory

Windy_Hill wrote:Does anyone remember that feeling on grand final day when the Dons used to be involved

I need some AO9064 to jog my memory

Absolutely on memory.

How shitful.

Daisy..1 wrote:OMG...I was strolling along the shops in Hawskburn this morning and passed a cafe window and my heart STOPPED and my face raged...THAT UGLY DOG TROLLOPE MOLE was in there! Took ALL MY INNER STRENGTH to not bang on that window and flip it the bird.... Oooh I SO WANTED TOO. My beautiful ignorant Irish partner whom knows nothing about AFL...was concerned as to why his subdued, normally level headed happy girl was wanting to smash an old lady in the head...the RAGE was undeniable.....I smelt BLOOD.

HA!

I was running this morning just off Hawksburn and saw Sean Wellman. I've seen him around that area a few times.